The title of this post could be the setup for a joke. Or it could be a ham-fisted intro to a post about Mormon baptism.
Actually, it’s both – and neither. Yes, it’s true that Mormons posthumously baptized Hitler, Anne Frank, Gandhi and Elvis. But sometimes reality is a bit of joke. And yes, this post is about the Mormon practice of necromancing posthumous baptism. But it’s really about the needless hysterics of those who went nuts when they found out Anne Frank had been the subject of this most quirky of Mormon practices.
I read New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd’s piece yesterday, in which she complained that Mitt Romney had not yet stepped up “as the cases have mounted of Jews posthumously and coercively baptized by Mormons.” We’ll leave aside the mystery of what Dowd can possibly mean by “coercively” – how do you coerce someone who is deceased? – and instead move on to the bizarre antics of both the left and the right when it comes to Romney’s religion.
First, Dowd is offended by the posthumous baptisms. But for the rest of the column she appears mostly bemused by Mormonism. This is typical of the left’s reaction to Romney’s religion: Mormonism is silly, let’s all have a big laugh about their magic underwear… also we’re really offended by this whole baptism thing. If Mormons are just weird and they believe in wacky things, what’s the use in getting upset about the baptisms? Are we afraid it works, that Elvis and Anne Frank are hanging out in Mormon heaven?
Meanwhile, the right is neither offended nor amused; mostly, they’re freaked out. They don’t understand Mormonism, it sounds really weird and so they’re scared. The left is feeling the exact same thing, but acting more like a playground bully, making fun of the kid they don’t understand. At any rate, both sides are freaked; at least the right is being honest about it.
All of this paranoia about the Republican probably-nominee and maybe-president’s religion has more to do with our lack of familiarity with Mormonism than it does with Mormonism’s nature as a religion inherently weirder than all others.
Let’s imagine for a minute that a Muslim – a real one – was running for president. “He prays five times every day? When will he find time to lead the free world?” “He fasts all day for a whole month every year? How will that affect his ability to govern?” “‘Islam’ means submission? Does that mean he’ll submit to the will of his whaddya-call-it, his imam?”
Or how about – as far-fetched as this many sound – a Hindu running for president. “She’s an idolater?” “Wait, she believes the universe is made out of musical vibrations?” “If she doesn’t think the world was created, if she believes it’s just always been there… where does she fall in the creationism debate?”
Closer to home, what about an Orthodox Jew running for president? “Does he really have sex with his wife through a sheet?” (No.) “He doesn’t have to celebrate Christmas, but he can’t even have a bit of the Christmas ham?”
My point is that all of us religious people are weird. And that it’s worth remembering that Mormons aren’t the only ones who wear magic underwear.
